SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS
|
|
- Silas George
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN The notions o separatedness and properness are the algebraic geometry analogues o the Hausdor condition and compactness in topology. For varieties over the complex numbers, it is possible to use the analytic topology inherited rom the usual topology on C in place o the Zariski topology, and the analytic topology corresponds well to our intuition, and allows us to use many tools rom topology and algebraic topology. An ongoing theme in algebraic geometry is that many such properties and tools can in act be translated into the context o varieties over an arbitrary ield, or more general schemes, but the translation may take some work. Oten one can proceed by inding a more abstract version o the usual topological deinition (or instance, involving products) and then translating this abstracted deinition into algebraic geometry. I the translation works well, it should recover the classical notions when we restrict our attention to complex varieties. 1. Separated morphisms Recalling that topological conditions such as the Hausdor property are requently called separation axioms, separatedness is the condition or (amilies o) schemes which plays the role o the Hausdor property in classical topology. The irst step is to observe that the usual deinition o Hausdor or a topological space X is equivalent to the condition that the diagonal (X) X X be a closed subset. We then used this idea in the context that X is a prevariety to deine what it should mean or it to be a variety. We will see later that this does indeed recover the classical Hausdor condition when applied to complex prevarieties, so it as well behaved as one could hope or when translating classical topological conditions to (pre)varieties over an arbitrary ield. Even better, this idea generalizes immediately to schemes. We irst deine: Deinition 1.1. Given a morphism : X Y o schemes, the diagonal morphism : X X Y X is induced by the identity morphisms X X on both actors. We then have: Deinition 1.2. A morphism : X Y is separated i the image o : X X Y X is closed. In this case, we also say that X is separated over Y. Example 1.3. A prevariety is a variety i and only i its associated scheme is separated over Spec k (note that this is not completely trivial, because the underlying topological spaces o a prevariety considered as a prevariety or as a scheme dier due to the inclusion o generic points). In particular, the scheme associated to any quasiprojective variety is separated over Spec k. We have: Proposition 1.4. For any morphism : X Y, the associated diagonal morphism : X X Y X is an immersion. I X and Y are aine schemes, then is a closed immersion. Proo. We irst show that is a closed immersion when X = Spec R and Y = Spec S are aine. In this case, is induced by the ring homomorphism R S R R determined by r r rr. This is visibly a surjective map, so it induces a closed immersion o aine schemes. For the general case, i we cover Y by aine open subschemes {V i }, and then cover X by aine open subschemes {U j } with the property that or each j, we have (U j ) V ij or some i j, then we 1
2 have aine open subschemes U j Vij U j which cover the image o X under, with the preimage o each equal to U j. Restricting to each o these open sets we ind that is the diagonal morphism or U j V ij, so is a closed immersion. We conclude that is an immersion, as desired. We immediately conclude: Corollary 1.5. A morphism o aine schemes is separated. Corollary 1.6. A morphism : X Y is separated i and only i the diagonal morphism is a closed immersion. Proo. Clearly i the diagonal is a closed immersion, then is separated. Conversely, by Proposition 1.4 i has closed image it must be a closed immersion. 2. Proper morphisms Properness is the algebraic geometry analogue o compactness, generalizing the deinition o complete varieties. The deinition is very similar to that or complete varieties, although to ensure good behavior we throw in a technical condition which is automatic or varieties. Deinition 2.1. A morphism X S is universally closed i or all morphisms S S, we have that the projection X S S S is closed. A morphism is proper i it is o inite type, separated, and universally closed. Here we say a morphism is closed i the induced map on the underlying topological spaces is closed. Example 2.2. A variety is complete i and only i its associated scheme is proper over Spec k. Remark 2.3. It is in act not terribly hard to show that a universally closed morphism is necessarily quasi-compact. Thus, in the deinition o properness we could simply have imposed that the morphism be locally o inite type. 3. Valuative criteria: statements Intuitively, one can think o separatedness as (a relative version o) uniqueness o limits, and properness as (a relative version o) existence o (unique) limits. It is not immediately obvious how to ormalize these ideas in algebraic geometry, but it turns out to be doable, via valuative criteria. Aside rom providing some intuition or separatedness and properness in terms o uniqueness and existence o limits, the valuative criteria are extremely important when working with moduli spaces. In this case they amount to studying the behavior o amilies o objects over valuation rings. We include the valuative criterion or universal closedness separately, because most algebraic stacks are not separated, and it is nonetheless helpul to know whether they are universally closed. The most classical version o this sort o criterion applies to prevarieties over an algebraically closed ield k. Let X be a prevariety. Then one can think o the setup or limits as ollows: let C be a smooth curve over k, and P C a point; then consider a morphism : C {P } X. We could picture that the points (Q) or Q C {P } have a limit as Q approaches P i extends to a morphism on all o C. Uniqueness o the limit then corresponds to uniqueness o the extension. In act, this works with prevarieties: as we ve mentioned previously, X is a variety i and only i limits are unique in this sense, which is to say i and only i or all C, P and as above, there is at most one extension o to all o C. Similarly a variety X is complete i and only i limits exist, which is to say or all C, P and as above there exists a (necessarily unique) extension o to all o C. The above criterion works exactly the same i we replace C by the local scheme Spec O C,P and C P by Spec K(C), where K(C) is the unction ield o C (and the ield o ractions o O C,P ). 2
3 Now, O C,P is a discrete valuation ring, and i we want to work with schemes not necessarily o inite type over an algebraically closed ield, we should consider arbitrary discrete valuation rings. In act, i we want to work with non-noetherian schemes, we should consider not just discrete valuation rings, but arbitrary valuation rings. This is precisely what the valuative criteria do. We begin by recalling the basic deinitions and properties or valuation rings. Deinition 3.1. An integral domain R with raction ield K is a valuation ring i or all x K, either x R or x 1 R. Remark 3.2. The reason or the terminology is that we obtain a homomorphism ν rom K to an ordered abelian group, with the property that x R i and only i ν(x) 0. This homomorphism is simply obtained by setting the abelian group equal to K /R, with ordering determined by the above condition. Moreover, given x, x K, with x+x 0, we have ν(x+x ) min{ν(x), ν(x )}. Indeed, suppose without loss o generality that ν(x) ν(x ), so that by deinition x /x R. Then (x + x )/x = 1 + x /x R, so ν(x + x ) ν(x), as desired. Such a homomorphism is called a valuation, and as in I.6 o Hartshorne [1], valuation rings may be deined equivalently in terms o existence o a valuation. The topological space underlying a valuation ring may have arbitrary dimension, but we nonetheless have the ollowing act, which ollows easily rom Remark 3.2: Proposition 3.3. A valuation ring is a local ring. In particular, i R is a valuation ring, then Spec R has unique generic and closed points, corresponding to the zero ideal and the maximal ideal, respectively. Throughout our discussion, a morphism Spec K Spec R is always assumed to be the canonical inclusion o the generic point. We can now state the valuative criteria. Deinition 3.4. We say a morphism : X Y satisies the existence (respectively, uniqueness) part o the valuative criterion i or every commutative diagram Spec K X Spec R Y with R a valuation ring and K its raction ield, there exists (respectively, there is at most one) one way o illing in the dashed arrow so that the diagram remains commutative. Theorem 3.5. Let : X Y be a morphism o schemes, and assume that is quasicompact. Then is separated i and only i it satisies the uniqueness part o the valuative criterion. Theorem 3.6. Let : X Y be a morphism o schemes, and assume that is quasicompact. Then is universally closed i and only i it satisies the existence part o the valuative criterion. From the above two theorems, we immediately conclude the valuative criterion or properness. Theorem 3.7. Let : X Y be a morphism o inite type, with quasicompact. Then is proper i and only i it satisies both the existence and uniqueness parts o the valuative criterion. Remark 3.8. Note that in the valuative criteria, i we have Y locally Noetherian and locally o inite type, then it is enough to only consider discrete valuation rings instead o arbitrary ones. In addition, in this case (and more generally i X is locally Noetherian) the condition that be quasi-comapct is automatically satisied. Thus, under mild Noetherian hypotheses we do not need to worry about checking this condition separately. 3
4 More generally, the condition that is quasi-compact is an annoying one, but it comes up naturally in a number o settings, enough so that it has a name quasi-separated. Note that a separated morphism is necessarily quasi-separated, since closed immersions are quasi-compact. Thus, what the valuative criterion is really saying is that separatedness is the union o two properties: quasi-separatedness, and the valuative condition. Similarly, as we mentioned earlier, every universally closed morphism is quasi-compact, so the valuative criterion says that being universally closed is equivalent to being both quasi-compact and satisying the valuative condition. Aside rom providing some intuition or separatedness and properness in terms o uniqueness and existence o limits, the valuative criteria are extremely important when working with moduli spaces. In this case they amount to studying the behavior o amilies o objects over valuation rings. We include the valuative criterion or universal closedness separately, because most algebraic stacks are not separated, and it is nonetheless helpul to know whether they are universally closed. 4. Valuative criteria: proos Each valuative criterion is o course two statements: irst, that separatedness (respectively, universal closedness) implies the stated criterion, and second, that the criterion implies separatedness (respectively, universal closedness). We thus have our statements to prove, and the proos are rather independent o one another. There is however substantial commonality between the proos that the two criteria imply separatedness and properness, so we will begin with the proos o these statements. Recall the ollowing concept: Deinition 4.1. Given a scheme X, and points x, x X, we say that x specializes to x i x is in the closure o {x}. A subset Z X is closed under specialization i or all points x, x X with x Z and x specializing to x, we also have x Z. Closed sets are visibly closed under specialization. Because schemes have (unique) generic points or all their irreducible closed subsets, the idea is that a subset o a scheme which is reasonably well behaved and closed under specialization should be closed. We then show that specializations (in both the relative and absolute settings) can be detected via morphisms rom the spectra o valuation rings. Putting these statements together will quickly yield the relevant direction o the valuative criteria. We begin by making the statement on closed sets and specialization more precise in an important special case: Proposition 4.2. Suppose : X Y is a quasi-compact morphism. I (X) is closed under specialization, then (X) is closed. For the proo, see Lemma 4.5 o Chapter II o Hartshorne [1]. Example 4.3. To see that quasicompactness is necessary, let Y = A 1 k, and let X be an ininite disjoint union o closed points o A 1 k, with the inclusion. Then (X) contains only closed points, so is closed under specialization, but is not a closed set. Note that this morphism is even locally o inite type, so quasicompactness is really the crucial hypothesis. Because is not closed, this is also an example that the criterion o Theorem 3.6 does not imply that a morphism is closed without a quasicompactness hypothesis. Proposition 4.2 will be enough or checking separatedness, but or universal closedness it is convenient to develop the statement into one on closed morphisms: Corollary 4.4. I : X Y is a quasicompact morphism, and or all x X, and y Y such that (x) specializes to y, we have some x X with x specializing to x, and (x ) = y, then is closed. 4
5 Proo. Given Z X closed, give Z the reduced induced structure. Then since closed immersions are quasicompact, Z Y is quasicompact, by the hypotheses we have the image o Z is closed under specialization, so (Z) Y is closed by Proposition 4.2. The main use o valuation rings will be the ollowing result, stating that specializations (in a relative and absolute setting) can be detected via morphisms rom the spectra o valuation rings. Proposition 4.5. Let X be a scheme, and x, x X with x specializing to x. Then there exists a valuation ring R and a morphism Spec R X with the generic point o Spec R mapping to x, and the closed point o Spec R mapping to x. More generally, i : X Y is any morphism, and we have x X, and y Y a specialization o (x), then there exists a valuation ring R, with raction ield K, and a commutative diagram Spec K Spec R X Y such that the image o Spec K is x, and the generic and closed points o Spec R map to (x) and y respectively. We omit the proo. From this, it is not hard to prove that the stated valuative criteria imply separatedness and universal closedness. Proo o i direction o Theorem 3.5. Suppose that the stated criterion is satisied, so we wish to show that is separated. Since we have assumed quasi-compact, by Proposition 4.2 it is enough to show that the image o is closed under specialization. Accordingly, suppose we have z specializing to z in X Y X, with z = (x) or some x X. By Proposition 4.5 there exists a valuation ring R with raction ield K, and a morphism ψ : Spec R X Y X such that the generic point o Spec R maps to z, and the closed point o Spec R maps to z. Taking irst and second projection yields two morphisms p 1 ψ and p 2 ψ rom Spec R to X, which give the same morphism Spec R Y ater composition with. We claim that p 1 ψ agrees with p 2 ψ i we precompose with ι : Spec K Spec R. It suices to check that ψ ι actors through, but since this is a morphism rom Spec K, it is enough to observe that Spec K maps to z, which by hypothesis is a point o. We thus obtain the claim, and then by hypothesis we conclude that p 1 ψ = p 2 ψ, and thus that ψ actors through. It ollows inally that z (X), so (X) is closed under specialization, as desired. The ollowing lemma is used in checking properness. We leave the proo, which uses only the universal property o ibered products, to the reader. Lemma 4.6. Suppose a morphism : X Y satisies the existence part o the valuative criterion. Then or every morphism Y Y, the base change X Y Y Y o satisies the existence part o the valuative criterion. Proo o i direction o Theorem 3.6. Suppose our criterion is satisied. Let Y Y be any morphism, and X = X Y Y ;. We thus wish to show that X Y is closed. Since quasicompactness is preserved under base change, by Corollary 4.4 it is enough to show that or any x X, and y Y with (x) specializing to y, there exists x X with x specializing to x and (x ) = y. 5
6 By Proposition 4.5 there exists a valuation ring R with raction ield K and a diagram Spec K Spec R with the image o Spec K being x, and the image o the generic and closed points o Spec R being (x) and y, respectively. By Lemma 4.6, our criterion holds also or X Y, so we conclude that we can ill in the dashed arrow so that the diagram still commutes, and setting x to be the image o the closed point o Spec R completes the argument. We now move on to checking that conversely, separatedness and universal closedness also imply the stated criteria. We can prove the ormer directly, while the latter requires an additional result on morphisms and spectra o valuation rings. Proo o only i direction o Theorem 3.5. Suppose that is separated, and we have a diagram as in the statement, and morphisms g 1, g 2 : Spec X making the diagram commute. We thus obtain a morphism g : Spec R X Y X such that g ι actors through, where ι : Spec K Spec R is the canonical inclusion. Because (X) is closed by hypothesis, we conclude that g(spec R) (X), and thus that g actors through, since Spec R is reduced. It thus ollows that g 1 = g 2. Proposition 4.7. Let R be a valuation ring with raction ield K. Suppose that : X Spec R is a closed morphism. Then given a morphism Spec K X such that the diagram X Y Spec K X Spec R id Spec R commutes, there exists a morphism illing in the dashed arrow so that the diagram still commutes. One can rephrase the proposition as saying that or a closed morphism to Spec R, every generic section extends to a section. We omit the proo. Proo o only i direction o Theorem 3.6. Suppose that is universally closed. Given a diagram as in the valuative criterion, we wish to prove existence o the dashed arrow. Consider the base change X := X Y Spec R Spec R, which is closed by hypothesis. The morphism Spec K X then induces a morphism Spec K X, and by Proposition 4.7 we obtain a morphism Spec R X which when composed with the projection morphism X X, gives us what we want. 5. Properties o properties o morphisms Properties o morphisms tend to have certain standard properties. One o the most important is that they should be stable under base change: that is, i : X Y is a morphism, and Y Y any other morphism, i has the property in question, then so should the induced morphism X Y Y Y. Another crucial property is that the property in question be closed under composition. We will assume (see Exercise II.3.11 (a) o Hartshorne [1], but note that it s easier to do (b) irst and then deduce (a)), the act that closed immersions are stable under base change; rom this one deduces easily that arbitrary immersions are likewise stable under base change. Beore moving on, we describe a consequence o this basic act: the notion o graph o a morphism. 6
7 Corollary 5.1. Suppose : X Y is a morphism o schemes over S. Then the morphism Γ : X X S Y induced by the identity and is a base change o Y/S. In particular Γ is an immersion, and i Y is separated over S, then Γ is a closed immersion. This construction induces a bijection between S-morphisms : X Y and subschemes Γ X S Y with the property that p 1 induces an isomorphism Γ X. Proo. For the irst assertion, one simply checks that the square X Γ Y X S Y id Y S Y satisies the universal property o the ibered product. It is clear then that given a morphism, we obtain a subscheme which maps isomorphically to X under p 1. Conversely, given such a subscheme, the composition p 2 p 1 1 yields an S-morphism X Y. It is straightorward to check that these constructions are maturally inverse. Because the diagonal is always an immersion, there are many properties o morphisms which are always, or requently, satisied by. For instance, is always locally o inite type. I is locally o inite type, then is locally o inite presentation. By deinition, i is separated then is a closed immersion, and hence proper. Again by deinition, i is quasiseparated, then is quasicompact, hence o inite type. These sorts o statements motivate the ollowing proposition. Proposition 5.2. Suppose that P is a property o morphisms such that: (i) P is closed under composition; (ii) P is stable under base change. Then it ollows that (iii) A product o morphisms having P has P (that is, i X Y and X Y are morphisms o S-schemes which each have P, then the induced morphism X S X Y S Y also has P ); (iv) i : X Y and g : Y Z are morphisms such that g has P and g has P, then has P ; (v) i : X Y has P and X red X has P, then red : X red Y red has P. The proo is the same as that o Exercise II.4.8 o Hartshorne [1]. To illustrate the technique, i : X Y and g : Y Z are morphisms such that g has P and g has P, then is the composition X Γ X Z Y p 2 Y, and Γ is a base change o g, while p 2 is a base change o g, so by (i) and (ii) we conclude that has P, as desired. Corollary 5.3. Suppose that P is a property o morphisms such that: (i) closed immersions have P ; (ii) P is closed under composition; (iii) P is stable under base change. Then it ollows that (iv) A product o morphisms having P has P ; (v) i : X Y and g : Y Z are morphisms such that g has P and g is separated, then has P ; (vi) i : X Y has P, then red : X red Y red has P. 7
8 I urther quasicompact immersions have P, then it is enough in (v) or g to be quasiseparated, and i all immersions have P, then no condition on g is necessary in (v). Proposition 5.4. The ollowing properties o morphisms satisy (i)-(iii) o Corollary 5.3 (and hence (iv)-(vi) as well): closed immersion; universally closed; proper. The ollowing properties satisy (i)-(iii) in the stronger orm that quasicompact immersions have the given property, and hence quasiseparatedness is enough in (v): quasi-compact; inite type. The ollowing properties satisy (i)-(iii) in the stronger orm that all immersions have the given property, and hence separatedness is unnecessary in (v): immersion; locally o inite type; separated. Finally, the property o being locally o inite presentation satisies (ii)-(vi) o Corollary 5.3, except that in (v) g is required to be locally o inite type rather than separated. We omit the proos, which are mostly straightorward. Note that one should not check these properties or separatedness or properness using the valuative criterion as in Hartshorne, as it is not signiicantly harder to check them directly, and one avoids unnecessary hypotheses that way. Example 5.5. A good example o a property which satisies (i)-(vi) o Corollary 5.3 but not their stronger version is closed immersions: or instance, i we take to be an inclusion morphism rom the aine line to the line with the doubled origin, and g the morphism rom the line with the doubled origin to the aine line which sends both origins to the origin, then g is the identity, hence a closed immersion, but is not a closed immersion. Thus the separatedness o g is necessary or closed immersions to satisy (v). On the other hand, open immersions don t satisy any orm o (v). Example 5.6. Note that a consequence o this is that i X, Y are locally o inite type over S (as is or instance the case or prevarieties), then any morphism between X and Y over S is automatically locally o inite type as well. (We can say the same or inite type i we assume also that Y is separated, or i we impose a locally Noetherian condition on S, which ensures that immersions are quasi-compact) As an immediate consequence o Corollary 5.3 (v) and Proposition 5.4 we obtain the ollowing analogue o the classical act that the continuous image o a compact set is compact, and hence closed in any Hausdor space: Corollary 5.7. Let : X Y be a morphism o schemes over S, with X universally closed over S, and Y separated over S. Then (X) is closed in Y, and more generally, is a (universally) closed morphism. Reerences [1] Robin Hartshorne, Algebraic geometry, Springer-Verlag, [2] Hideyuki Matsumura, Commutative ring theory, Cambridge University Press,
SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS
SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN Last quarter, we introduced the closed diagonal condition or a prevariety to be a prevariety, and the universally closed condition or a variety to be complete.
More informationVALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN
VALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN Intuitively, one can think o separatedness as (a relative version o) uniqueness o limits, and properness as (a relative version o) existence o (unique) limits. It is not
More informationVALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS
VALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN Recall that or prevarieties, we had criteria or being a variety or or being complete in terms o existence and uniqueness o limits, where
More informationCHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES
CHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES BRIAN OSSERMAN In this note, we introduce the concept which plays the role of compactness for varieties completeness. We prove that completeness can be characterized
More informationCHEAT SHEET: PROPERTIES OF MORPHISMS OF SCHEMES
CHEAT SHEET: PROPERTIES OF MORPHISMS OF SCHEMES BRIAN OSSERMAN The purpose of this cheat sheet is to provide an easy reference for definitions of various properties of morphisms of schemes, and basic results
More informationCHOW S LEMMA. Matthew Emerton
CHOW LEMMA Matthew Emerton The aim o this note is to prove the ollowing orm o Chow s Lemma: uppose that : is a separated inite type morphism o Noetherian schemes. Then (or some suiciently large n) there
More informationDescent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014
Descent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014 We treat two eatures o the étale site: descent o morphisms and descent o quasi-coherent sheaves. All will also be true on the larger pp and
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 26
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 26 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Proper morphisms 1 Last day: separatedness, definition of variety. Today: proper morphisms. I said a little more about separatedness of
More informationCOMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY
COMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY BRIAN OSSERMAN Classical algebraic geometers studied algebraic varieties over the complex numbers. In this setting, they didn t have to worry about the Zariski
More informationNONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN
NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN The primary goal of this note is to prove that every abstract nonsingular curve can be realized as an open subset of a (unique) nonsingular projective curve. Note that
More informationMath 216A. A gluing construction of Proj(S)
Math 216A. A gluing construction o Proj(S) 1. Some basic deinitions Let S = n 0 S n be an N-graded ring (we ollows French terminology here, even though outside o France it is commonly accepted that N does
More informationMath 248B. Base change morphisms
Math 248B. Base change morphisms 1. Motivation A basic operation with shea cohomology is pullback. For a continuous map o topological spaces : X X and an abelian shea F on X with (topological) pullback
More information(C) The rationals and the reals as linearly ordered sets. Contents. 1 The characterizing results
(C) The rationals and the reals as linearly ordered sets We know that both Q and R are something special. When we think about about either o these we usually view it as a ield, or at least some kind o
More informationMATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 12
MATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 2 CİHAN BAHRAN 3.2.. Let Y be a Noetherian scheme. Show that any Y -scheme X of finite type is Noetherian. Moreover, if Y is of finite dimension, then so is X. Write f
More informationThe Clifford algebra and the Chevalley map - a computational approach (detailed version 1 ) Darij Grinberg Version 0.6 (3 June 2016). Not proofread!
The Cliord algebra and the Chevalley map - a computational approach detailed version 1 Darij Grinberg Version 0.6 3 June 2016. Not prooread! 1. Introduction: the Cliord algebra The theory o the Cliord
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 47 AND 48
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 47 AND 48 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. The local criterion for flatness 1 2. Base-point-free, ample, very ample 2 3. Every ample on a proper has a tensor power that
More informationSmooth morphisms. Peter Bruin 21 February 2007
Smooth morphisms Peter Bruin 21 February 2007 Introduction The goal of this talk is to define smooth morphisms of schemes, which are one of the main ingredients in Néron s fundamental theorem [BLR, 1.3,
More information3 Lecture 3: Spectral spaces and constructible sets
3 Lecture 3: Spectral spaces and constructible sets 3.1 Introduction We want to analyze quasi-compactness properties of the valuation spectrum of a commutative ring, and to do so a digression on constructible
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES
AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES BROOKE ULLERY Abstract. This paper gives a basic introduction to modern algebraic geometry. The goal of this paper is to present the basic concepts of algebraic geometry,
More informationCategories and Natural Transformations
Categories and Natural Transormations Ethan Jerzak 17 August 2007 1 Introduction The motivation or studying Category Theory is to ormalise the underlying similarities between a broad range o mathematical
More informationNOTES ON FLAT MORPHISMS AND THE FPQC TOPOLOGY
NOTES ON FLAT MORPHISMS AND THE FPQC TOPOLOGY RUNE HAUGSENG The aim of these notes is to define flat and faithfully flat morphisms and review some of their important properties, and to define the fpqc
More informationLecture 3: Flat Morphisms
Lecture 3: Flat Morphisms September 29, 2014 1 A crash course on Properties of Schemes For more details on these properties, see [Hartshorne, II, 1-5]. 1.1 Open and Closed Subschemes If (X, O X ) is a
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Proper morphisms 1 2. Scheme-theoretic closure, and scheme-theoretic image 2 3. Rational maps 3 4. Examples of rational maps 5 Last day:
More informationConcentrated Schemes
Concentrated Schemes Daniel Murfet July 9, 2006 The original reference for quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms is EGA IV.1. Definition 1. A morphism of schemes f : X Y is quasi-compact if there
More informationALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES.
ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES. ANDREW SALCH 1. Affine schemes. About notation: I am in the habit of writing f (U) instead of f 1 (U) for the preimage of a subset
More informationAlgebraic Geometry Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry
More informationNOTES ON DIMENSION THEORY OF SCHEMES
NOTES ON DIMENSION THEORY OF SCHEMES BRIAN OSSERMAN In this expository note, we discuss various aspects of the theory of dimension of schemes, in particular focusing on which hypotheses are necessary in
More informationAlgebraic Geometry I Lectures 22 and 23
Algebraic Geometry I Lectures 22 and 23 Amod Agashe December 4, 2008 1 Fibered Products (contd..) Recall the deinition o ibered products g!θ X S Y X Y π 2 π 1 S By the universal mapping property o ibered
More informationwhere Σ is a finite discrete Gal(K sep /K)-set unramified along U and F s is a finite Gal(k(s) sep /k(s))-subset
Classification of quasi-finite étale separated schemes As we saw in lecture, Zariski s Main Theorem provides a very visual picture of quasi-finite étale separated schemes X over a henselian local ring
More informationHSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS
HSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS MICHAEL BARR Abstract. Given a triple T on a complete category C and a actorization system E /M on the category o algebras, we show there is a 1-1 correspondence
More informationMath 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology
Math 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology 1. Motivation Recall the following fundamental general theorem, the so-called cohomology and base change theorem: Theorem 1.1 (Grothendieck).
More informationMath 249B. Nilpotence of connected solvable groups
Math 249B. Nilpotence of connected solvable groups 1. Motivation and examples In abstract group theory, the descending central series {C i (G)} of a group G is defined recursively by C 0 (G) = G and C
More informationDEFORMATIONS VIA DIMENSION THEORY
DEFORMATIONS VIA DIMENSION THEORY BRIAN OSSERMAN Abstract. We show that standard arguments for deformations based on dimension counts can also be applied over a (not necessarily Noetherian) valuation ring
More informationExploring the Exotic Setting for Algebraic Geometry
Exploring the Exotic Setting for Algebraic Geometry Victor I. Piercey University of Arizona Integration Workshop Project August 6-10, 2010 1 Introduction In this project, we will describe the basic topology
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETR CLASS 24 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Normalization, continued 1 2. Sheaf Spec 3 3. Sheaf Proj 4 Last day: Fibers of morphisms. Properties preserved by base change: open immersions,
More information3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions
24 Andreas Gathmann 3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions After having defined affine varieties, our next goal must be to say what kind of maps between them we want to consider as morphisms, i. e. as nice
More informationLECTURE 6: FIBER BUNDLES
LECTURE 6: FIBER BUNDLES In this section we will introduce the interesting class o ibrations given by iber bundles. Fiber bundles lay an imortant role in many geometric contexts. For examle, the Grassmaniann
More informationCLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 6
CLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 6 BERTRAND GUILLOU 1. Mon, Feb. 21 Note that since we have C() = X A C (A) and the inclusion A C (A) at time 0 is a coibration, it ollows that the pushout map i
More information0.1 Spec of a monoid
These notes were prepared to accompany the first lecture in a seminar on logarithmic geometry. As we shall see in later lectures, logarithmic geometry offers a natural approach to study semistable schemes.
More information2. Prime and Maximal Ideals
18 Andreas Gathmann 2. Prime and Maximal Ideals There are two special kinds of ideals that are of particular importance, both algebraically and geometrically: the so-called prime and maximal ideals. Let
More informationCHAPTER 0 PRELIMINARY MATERIAL. Paul Vojta. University of California, Berkeley. 18 February 1998
CHAPTER 0 PRELIMINARY MATERIAL Paul Vojta University of California, Berkeley 18 February 1998 This chapter gives some preliminary material on number theory and algebraic geometry. Section 1 gives basic
More informationINVERSE LIMITS AND PROFINITE GROUPS
INVERSE LIMITS AND PROFINITE GROUPS BRIAN OSSERMAN We discuss the inverse limit construction, and consider the special case of inverse limits of finite groups, which should best be considered as topological
More informationMath 754 Chapter III: Fiber bundles. Classifying spaces. Applications
Math 754 Chapter III: Fiber bundles. Classiying spaces. Applications Laurențiu Maxim Department o Mathematics University o Wisconsin maxim@math.wisc.edu April 18, 2018 Contents 1 Fiber bundles 2 2 Principle
More informationFinite Dimensional Hilbert Spaces are Complete for Dagger Compact Closed Categories (Extended Abstract)
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 270 (1) (2011) 113 119 www.elsevier.com/locate/entcs Finite Dimensional Hilbert Spaces are Complete or Dagger Compact Closed Categories (Extended bstract)
More information1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transformations. Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an identity.
MacLane: Categories or Working Mathematician 1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transormations 1.1 Axioms or Categories 1.2 Categories Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an
More informationDIVISORS ON NONSINGULAR CURVES
DIVISORS ON NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN We now begin a closer study of the behavior of projective nonsingular curves, and morphisms between them, as well as to projective space. To this end, we introduce
More informationDESCENT THEORY (JOE RABINOFF S EXPOSITION)
DESCENT THEORY (JOE RABINOFF S EXPOSITION) RAVI VAKIL 1. FEBRUARY 21 Background: EGA IV.2. Descent theory = notions that are local in the fpqc topology. (Remark: we aren t assuming finite presentation,
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Vector bundles and locally free sheaves 1 2. Toward quasicoherent sheaves: the distinguished affine base 5 Quasicoherent and coherent sheaves
More informationFIXED POINTS OF RENORMALIZATION.
FIXED POINTS OF RENORMALIZATION. XAVIER BUFF Abstract. To study the geometry o a Fibonacci map o even degree l 4, Lyubich [Ly2] deined a notion o generalized renormalization, so that is renormalizable
More informationProblem Set. Problems on Unordered Summation. Math 5323, Fall Februray 15, 2001 ANSWERS
Problem Set Problems on Unordered Summation Math 5323, Fall 2001 Februray 15, 2001 ANSWERS i 1 Unordered Sums o Real Terms In calculus and real analysis, one deines the convergence o an ininite series
More informationLecture 9 - Faithfully Flat Descent
Lecture 9 - Faithfully Flat Descent October 15, 2014 1 Descent of morphisms In this lecture we study the concept of faithfully flat descent, which is the notion that to obtain an object on a scheme X,
More informationAlgebraic Geometry Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry
More information(dim Z j dim Z j 1 ) 1 j i
Math 210B. Codimension 1. Main result and some interesting examples Let k be a field, and A a domain finitely generated k-algebra. In class we have seen that the dimension theory of A is linked to the
More informationPreliminary Exam Topics Sarah Mayes
Preliminary Exam Topics Sarah Mayes 1. Sheaves Definition of a sheaf Definition of stalks of a sheaf Definition and universal property of sheaf associated to a presheaf [Hartshorne, II.1.2] Definition
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Quasicoherent sheaves 1 2. Quasicoherent sheaves form an abelian category 5 We began by recalling the distinguished affine base. Definition.
More informationA NOTE ON HENSEL S LEMMA IN SEVERAL VARIABLES
PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 125, Number 11, November 1997, Pages 3185 3189 S 0002-9939(97)04112-9 A NOTE ON HENSEL S LEMMA IN SEVERAL VARIABLES BENJI FISHER (Communicated by
More informationMath 145. Codimension
Math 145. Codimension 1. Main result and some interesting examples In class we have seen that the dimension theory of an affine variety (irreducible!) is linked to the structure of the function field in
More information10. Smooth Varieties. 82 Andreas Gathmann
82 Andreas Gathmann 10. Smooth Varieties Let a be a point on a variety X. In the last chapter we have introduced the tangent cone C a X as a way to study X locally around a (see Construction 9.20). It
More informationMATH 8254 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY HOMEWORK 1
MATH 8254 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY HOMEWORK 1 CİHAN BAHRAN I discussed several of the problems here with Cheuk Yu Mak and Chen Wan. 4.1.12. Let X be a normal and proper algebraic variety over a field k. Show
More informationINTERSECTION THEORY CLASSES 20 AND 21: BIVARIANT INTERSECTION THEORY
INTERSECTION THEORY CLASSES 20 AND 21: BIVARIANT INTERSECTION THEORY RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. What we re doin this week 1 2. Precise statements 2 2.1. Basic operations and properties 4 3. Provin thins 6
More informationALGEBRAIC K-THEORY HANDOUT 5: K 0 OF SCHEMES, THE LOCALIZATION SEQUENCE FOR G 0.
ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY HANDOUT 5: K 0 OF SCHEMES, THE LOCALIZATION SEQUENCE FOR G 0. ANDREW SALCH During the last lecture, we found that it is natural (even just for doing undergraduatelevel complex analysis!)
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 51 AND 52
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 51 AND 52 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Smooth, étale, unramified 1 2. Harder facts 5 3. Generic smoothness in characteristic 0 7 4. Formal interpretations 11 1. SMOOTH,
More informationGENERALIZED ABSTRACT NONSENSE: CATEGORY THEORY AND ADJUNCTIONS
GENERALIZED ABSTRACT NONSENSE: CATEGORY THEORY AND ADJUNCTIONS CHRIS HENDERSON Abstract. This paper will move through the basics o category theory, eventually deining natural transormations and adjunctions
More informationABSTRACT NONSINGULAR CURVES
ABSTRACT NONSINGULAR CURVES Affine Varieties Notation. Let k be a field, such as the rational numbers Q or the complex numbers C. We call affine n-space the collection A n k of points P = a 1, a,..., a
More informationSynopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5
Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5 5. Quasi-affine, quasi-projective, proper and projective morphisms 5.1. Quasi-affine morphisms. Definition (5.1.1). A scheme is quasi-affine if it is isomorphic
More informationSynopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 3
Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 3 3. Homogeneous spectrum of a sheaf of graded algebras 3.1. Homogeneous spectrum of a graded quasi-coherent O Y algebra. (3.1.1). Let Y be a prescheme. A sheaf
More informationAdic Spaces. Torsten Wedhorn. June 19, 2012
Adic Spaces Torsten Wedhorn June 19, 2012 This script is highly preliminary and unfinished. It is online only to give the audience of our lecture easy access to it. Therefore usage is at your own risk.
More informationLIMITS AND COLIMITS. m : M X. in a category G of structured sets of some sort call them gadgets the image subset
5 LIMITS ND COLIMITS In this chapter we irst briely discuss some topics namely subobjects and pullbacks relating to the deinitions that we already have. This is partly in order to see how these are used,
More informationThe basics of frame theory
First version released on 30 June 2006 This version released on 30 June 2006 The basics o rame theory Harold Simmons The University o Manchester hsimmons@ manchester.ac.uk This is the irst part o a series
More informationGENERAL ABSTRACT NONSENSE
GENERAL ABSTRACT NONSENSE MARCELLO DELGADO Abstract. In this paper, we seek to understand limits, a uniying notion that brings together the ideas o pullbacks, products, and equalizers. To do this, we will
More informationAlgebraic Geometry Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry
More information1. Valuative Criteria Specialization vs being closed
1. Valuative Criteria 1.1. Specialization vs being closed Proposition 1.1 (Specialization vs Closed). Let f : X Y be a quasi-compact S-morphisms, and let Z X be closed non-empty. 1) For every z Z there
More informationSynopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 4. Proposition (4.1.6). The canonical homomorphism ( ) is surjective [(3.2.4)].
Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 4 4.1. Definition of projective bundles. 4. Projective bundles. Ample sheaves Definition (4.1.1). Let S(E) be the symmetric algebra of a quasi-coherent O Y -module.
More informationDirect Limits. Mathematics 683, Fall 2013
Direct Limits Mathematics 683, Fall 2013 In this note we define direct limits and prove their basic properties. This notion is important in various places in algebra. In particular, in algebraic geometry
More informationBoolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem
Boolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem Hongtaek Jung December 27, 2017 Abstract This is a part of a supplementary note for a Logic and Set Theory course. The main goal is to
More informationProbabilistic Observations and Valuations (Extended Abstract) 1
Replace this ile with prentcsmacro.sty or your meeting, or with entcsmacro.sty or your meeting. Both can be ound at the ENTCS Macro Home Page. Probabilistic Observations and Valuations (Extended Abstract)
More informationMATH 233B, FLATNESS AND SMOOTHNESS.
MATH 233B, FLATNESS AND SMOOTHNESS. The discussion of smooth morphisms is one place were Hartshorne doesn t do a very good job. Here s a summary of this week s material. I ll also insert some (optional)
More information14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces
14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces 14.1 Introduction The aim of this lecture and the next two is to address general adic spaces and their connection to rigid geometry. 14.2 Two open questions
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 41
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 41 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Normalization 1 2. Extending maps to projective schemes over smooth codimension one points: the clear denominators theorem 5 Welcome back!
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Motivation and game plan 1 2. The affine case: three definitions 2 Welcome back to the third quarter! The theme for this quarter, insofar
More information1 Notations and Statement of the Main Results
An introduction to algebraic fundamental groups 1 Notations and Statement of the Main Results Throughout the talk, all schemes are locally Noetherian. All maps are of locally finite type. There two main
More informationSpan, Cospan, and Other Double Categories
ariv:1201.3789v1 [math.ct] 18 Jan 2012 Span, Cospan, and Other Double Categories Susan Nieield July 19, 2018 Abstract Given a double category D such that D 0 has pushouts, we characterize oplax/lax adjunctions
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 43
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 43 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Facts we ll soon know about curves 1 1. FACTS WE LL SOON KNOW ABOUT CURVES We almost know enough to say a lot of interesting things about
More informationBRIAN OSSERMAN. , let t be a coordinate for the line, and take θ = d. A differential form ω may be written as g(t)dt,
CONNECTIONS, CURVATURE, AND p-curvature BRIAN OSSERMAN 1. Classical theory We begin by describing the classical point of view on connections, their curvature, and p-curvature, in terms of maps of sheaves
More informationRepresentation Theory of Hopf Algebroids. Atsushi Yamaguchi
Representation Theory o H Algebroids Atsushi Yamaguchi Contents o this slide 1. Internal categories and H algebroids (7p) 2. Fibered category o modules (6p) 3. Representations o H algebroids (7p) 4. Restrictions
More informationTHE KEEL MORI THEOREM VIA STACKS
THE KEEL MORI THEOREM VIA STACKS BRIAN CONRAD 1. Introduction Let X be an Artin stack (always assumed to have quasi-compact and separated diagonal over Spec Z; cf. [2, 1.3]). A coarse moduli space for
More informationCATEGORIES. 1.1 Introduction
1 CATEGORIES 1.1 Introduction What is category theory? As a irst approximation, one could say that category theory is the mathematical study o (abstract) algebras o unctions. Just as group theory is the
More informationChapter 2 Linear Transformations
Chapter 2 Linear Transformations Linear Transformations Loosely speaking, a linear transformation is a function from one vector space to another that preserves the vector space operations. Let us be more
More informationHARTSHORNE EXERCISES
HARTSHORNE EXERCISES J. WARNER Hartshorne, Exercise I.5.6. Blowing Up Curve Singularities (a) Let Y be the cusp x 3 = y 2 + x 4 + y 4 or the node xy = x 6 + y 6. Show that the curve Ỹ obtained by blowing
More informationWe can choose generators of this k-algebra: s i H 0 (X, L r i. H 0 (X, L mr )
MODULI PROBLEMS AND GEOMETRIC INVARIANT THEORY 43 5.3. Linearisations. An abstract projective scheme X does not come with a pre-specified embedding in a projective space. However, an ample line bundle
More informationLINKED ALTERNATING FORMS AND LINKED SYMPLECTIC GRASSMANNIANS
LINKED ALTERNATING FORMS AND LINKED SYMPLECTIC GRASSMANNIANS BRIAN OSSERMAN AND MONTSERRAT TEIXIDOR I BIGAS Abstract. Motivated by applications to higher-rank Brill-Noether theory and the Bertram-Feinberg-Mukai
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Where we were 1 2. Yoneda s lemma 2 3. Limits and colimits 6 4. Adjoints 8 First, some bureaucratic details. We will move to 380-F for Monday
More informationSCHEMES. David Harari. Tsinghua, February-March 2005
SCHEMES David Harari Tsinghua, February-March 2005 Contents 1. Basic notions on schemes 2 1.1. First definitions and examples.................. 2 1.2. Morphisms of schemes : first properties.............
More informationClassification of effective GKM graphs with combinatorial type K 4
Classiication o eective GKM graphs with combinatorial type K 4 Shintarô Kuroki Department o Applied Mathematics, Faculty o Science, Okayama Uniervsity o Science, 1-1 Ridai-cho Kita-ku, Okayama 700-0005,
More informationUMS 7/2/14. Nawaz John Sultani. July 12, Abstract
UMS 7/2/14 Nawaz John Sultani July 12, 2014 Notes or July, 2 2014 UMS lecture Abstract 1 Quick Review o Universals Deinition 1.1. I S : D C is a unctor and c an object o C, a universal arrow rom c to S
More information15 Lecture 15: Points and lft maps
15 Lecture 15: Points and lft maps 15.1 A noetherian property Let A be an affinoid algebraic over a non-archimedean field k and X = Spa(A, A 0 ). For any x X, the stalk O X,x is the limit of the directed
More informationA PATHOLOGY OF ASYMPTOTIC MULTIPLICITY IN THE RELATIVE SETTING
A PATHOLOGY OF ASYMPTOTIC MULTIPLICITY IN THE RELATIVE SETTING JOHN LESIEUTRE Abstract. We point out an example o a projective amily π : X S, a π-pseudoeective divisor D on X, and a subvariety V X or which
More informationThe Segre Embedding. Daniel Murfet May 16, 2006
The Segre Embedding Daniel Murfet May 16, 2006 Throughout this note all rings are commutative, and A is a fixed ring. If S, T are graded A-algebras then the tensor product S A T becomes a graded A-algebra
More informationLecture 7: Etale Fundamental Group - Examples
Lecture 7: Etale Fundamental Group - Examples October 15, 2014 In this lecture our only goal is to give lots of examples of etale fundamental groups so that the reader gets some feel for them. Some of
More informationh M (T ). The natural isomorphism η : M h M determines an element U = η 1
MODULI PROBLEMS AND GEOMETRIC INVARIANT THEORY 7 2.3. Fine moduli spaces. The ideal situation is when there is a scheme that represents our given moduli functor. Definition 2.15. Let M : Sch Set be a moduli
More information